|
On May 15 2013 22:42 deconduo wrote:
Can an Angel's movespeed be reduced to 0 if enough people are looking at it?
If this is the case, it makes a good argument for gathering in the middle with everyone looking outwards. If they can't reach us they can't kill us.
But wouldn't mkfuba have to actively respond to the PM to participate in the game? I wouldn't say lynch him outright, but I'm a little suspicious. Let's see how the day goes though.
My only red leaning read at this point is Vivax, whose filter after game start seems to be weak counterarguments to a fairly solid plan. His last post (the big one) also references the fact that with everyone moving at max speed, it would be easier to discern who is who. After explicitly saying that by learning this, Angels can figure out who is dangerous and vulnerable. I feel as if he is looking for this information for this reason.
##Vote: Vivax
|
On May 16 2013 05:17 Vivax wrote:
This is a scumslip, the host explicitly said that it's possible that the angels know our movement speeds already. You showing this level of security as to immediately call me scum in spite of that fact, is proof that you are either not reading the thread with your due diligence, or scum with the information that angels don't know our movement speed, given your overall play I'm strongly leaning on the latter.
I'm expecting your explanation for this, and I want reads from you on every player who posted something substantial in the thread.
It's possible. Which means maybe yes, maybe no. If yes, then angels gain nothing and town gains something. If no, then the angels and town both gain something, but angels gain more because they can use the info to win whereas town only needs to coordinate. However, in the second scenario, townies are able to lie/stay silent to protect themselves. If my movement speed was 5, for instance, I could say I had 2-3 movespeed to attract nearby angels. I see something I'm not supposed to, I can use all 5 the next night and dart around like the wind. Again, assuming the angels know nothing.
Really it's all chance. And I don't think it's worth a night experimenting with it. So I'm going to back away from this and agree to disagree. At the very least we will voice our movements before the deadline for clarity's sake. Anything else, like you said, is open to discussion.
##unvote
Time for some thoughts on Ghost's recent post.
I chimed in my two cents, and then I was off to scum hunt. Unfortunately, it seems that no one is around whenever I'm here.
I find a bunch of problems with this alone. Being alone while scumhunting makes my mafiadick hard. It means I can focus on what's already present in the thread with a clear mind, without having to worry about changing conditions. A lot of my reasoning goes out the window when the thread updates. I don't know why you'd have a problem with it and resort to lurking.
I'm not happy with Vivax's play, but I'm never happy with Vivax's play.
Sentinel's play has been bad this game as well, but IIRC, I always think that.
Explain me why you vote for Vivax and not myself. That's a shitty vote to throw around.
Game plan for myself is to organize my thoughts because that's what I'm lacking right now. I'm going to draft up another spreadsheet to consolidate my reads tomorrow and then start making calls from that.
|
On May 16 2013 20:55 marvellosity wrote:Show nested quote +On May 16 2013 20:23 Vivax wrote:
I didn't even realize he had written that.
Sentinel gets townie points for pointing out a selectivity that would favor him.
I'm just troubled with ghost showing a preference at all. It's possible he and sentinel are scumbuddies, but why does sentinel point it out then? This is a really good point. My brain hasn't managed to process a good answer since reading it yet.
I could see ghost either intentionally or not setting me up for the fall with that comment as it pretty much implies that he's avoiding any accusation of myself. It would make sense if he were scum to take another player down with him if he ever got caught.
|
My plan is to leave a vote on ghost for now. I'll be home in an hour and a half where I'll try to contribute before the lynch. I've skimmed the thread since my last post and will reread when I get home.
Vote: ghost_403
|
On May 17 2013 00:14 Sharrant wrote:
Sentinel:
Sentinel is where my vote would feel safest. His filter just seems off, but not in the "paranoia/jumping at shadows" way that a town player can feel off. He spent so much time defending himself about his weird read early on, but people were asking him questions about it, so he gets a little bit of a pass on that part. The biggest thing that reads as scum in his filter to me, is his dropping of Vivax as a suspect just when everyone else was warming up to his lynch.
Sentinel, what do you make of Vivax's actions post-removing your vote from him? Do they reinforce your idea to remove your vote from him, or are they making you reconsider voting for him?
The reason I dropped Vivax is because our discussion would have no positive repercussions for the town. He interpreted the setup one way and I another. Since neither of us had anything to go on and arguing it would only spam up the thread, I decided to drop it until one of us had substantial evidence that his or my way of thinking was the right one.
I'm really curious myself why Vivax became public enemy number one. What I saw was that he accused Oats but had weak reasoning, BH attacked him and Oats followed up for a quick two votes. Maybe the only thing after that was that Vivax let off a potential scumslip in knowing who B and J are. I feel neutral towards Vivax until I see how he vs Oats turns out.
If I were scum I would cling onto Vivax and also further my case in some way or at least sweep it under the rug, not explicitly say "Let's put this aside and focus on something else." If he were town, woo hoo town is dead. If he were scum, I would have either defended him if I felt Oats was weak or bussed him if the sheepwagon gathered enough momentum.
Sharrant's large entering post was a bit weird. A lot of the leads were meta-based. I'd like to see a few links to posts to justify those, especially how you and ghost were "on the same wavelength" before.
I'm going for a quick eat, if I get back before t-minus 10 minutes I'll add more analysis of someone else
|
I'm wondering if dec is worth enough to switch my vote for. His plan does reek of foul play, and his solution isn't much better. I'm curious as to why he went to ground since it does seem like he's purposely doing it. I think ghost is scum but I think dec is as well at this point.
##unvote
##Vote: deconduo
|
You have two minutes BH. Sell me. I have the changing post ready to go. Just sell me.
|
Because I'm adamantly hanging on to dec for the meantime.
|
|
|
|
|
There will be a 1 hour resolution period where no posting will be allowed.
everyone shut up pls
|
|
|
Ok hold up. D is gone, as is J. So those are our two.
|
I sent face left, 2 right 1 up. Nobody stood still as far as I see, so it must have gone through (I did it right on the deadline).
I don't think anyone turned left, did they? Which would mean I'm player G.
|
On May 17 2013 06:21 deconduo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2013 06:19 [UoN]Sentinel wrote:
I sent face left, 2 right 1 up. Nobody stood still as far as I see, so it must have gone through (I did it right on the deadline).
I don't think anyone turned left, did they? Which would mean I'm player G. Don't think so, G moved 4 squares in a straight line.
Right you are.
In that case, here's a thought. G is blind, D is dead. I suspect there is an angel in the vicinity. He killed D (marv) and blinded G so G can't find him. Which means G is in danger, whoever he is.
|
F moved 2 right 1 up, not 2 down 1 left. It's correspondent to your final facing position.
Other than the fact that it's a 180 degree face turn instead of a 90 degree one, I think I might actually be F.
|
On May 16 2013 05:32 Vivax wrote:
I don't see what you want to say with that post. We all have movement speeds, but do the angels know it?
Sentinel looks sure that they don't know it.
It's a matter of picking more information for us or less information for the angels (in the case that they DON'T know it), which isn't even sure.
Let's say 4 of us have MS 3, then 4 have 4, last 4 have 5.
If we purposefully slow down our movement it will be harder to discern who is who, at best if 3 of the MS 5 players move slower, then we could be sure about who is the remaining MS 5 player.
It's essentially a gamble on the angels having that information or not having it, let's talk a little about it.
Regarding this post and Vivax's side in the argument, does this imply that the angels don't know all of the players' movespeeds?
|
|
|
On May 17 2013 06:42 Zephirdd wrote:Show nested quote +Zephirdd is not suspicious at all and is not threatened. Why would a scum Vivax decide to push a vote on this guy without any other reason than desperation? had he survived, a big shitstorm would ensue today. Especially because at a point he was actually fooling me.
Right but he could ensure his survival in other ways. He could have pushed dec (who was gathering steam at this point), maybe not written as much but still found something. He could have broken off some votes onto feryl, Sharrant or myself, each of whom had at least 1-2 mildly suspicious people on them at the time. If he thought it was too late, could have defended me à la ghost_403.
EBWOP: Implied defend, push cases on one of the above players and ignore these faults of other players.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
